GIN Bonanza 3 S (85-100)

GIN Bonanza 3  S  (85-100) 

The GIN Bonanza 3 is the 2023-25 new EN-C, 2- liner glider that replaces the Bonanza 2 which was a 3-liner with a 6.4 aspect ratio. 

The Bonanza 3 only has one A and one B. It is a pure 2-liner with a 6.3 aspect ratio and equipped with GIN’s new wave leading edge that was implemented on their CCC glider the Boomerang 12. 

GIN uses on the upper surface leading edge:  Myungjin MJ40 MF and Myungjin MJ32 MF and on the Lower surface: Porcher Skytex, 27 g/m².

The lines are a mix of:   8001 / 050 / 070 / 090 / 130 / 190 / 230 / 280 / 340  (unsheathed aramid)  

The overall construction and details are really nice with excellent workmanship. 

Launching:

The Bonanza 3 launches easily in nil wind and the rise is straightforward, without any hard point or delay. In stronger air above 20 km/h, it is also very easy to launch and quite manageable in correcting it if needed, and the take-off is very quick. 

I flew the Bonanza 3 from 94 to 97. In all those weights it will behave very taught and forgiving.  The B3 was flown in weak air to some stronger air, and finally, the feedback from my friends and I was unanimous by the easiness and high comfort of the Bonanza 3 in active air. It resembles the comfort of the Alpina 4 if any pilot had a run on it.  For a 2-liner it has similar comfort as to the Volt 4 with an even more coherent and solid structure. 

I found out the stall speed is very low as if the glider is telling you or informing you that you have a little more to hold…And in tight turns, when you apply a bit more brake impute into a turn, the Bonanza 3 informs you that you also have a margin before a spin! It is for me a new feel under that glider, and I can only say that the wave leading edge has something to do with that specific feel, never felt before on any other wing. 

The stall and spin will eventually happen, but there’s something that delays them if you listen carefully to the glider. 

 The turning behavior and brake travel feel exactly similar to the Bonanza 3 which was excellent, but without the excessive movements that were on the B3. The brake travel is short to moderate with a more forgiving length. The Bonanza 3 responds well to pilot input in all conditions, even in nasty ones, and the authority on the brakes is really high giving the pilot that extra feel of control in moving air. The brake could be described as, linear and responsive thought out the range. To give an example, it resembles the Alpina 4 brake response but with a more linear feel.  Overall it is quite agile.

The Bonanza 3 doesn’t have pitch behavior at all. no back pitch nor front. The roll also is very balanced without being dull or dynamic. That’s why it is so comfortable in thermals. In strong cores, the Bonanza 3 slows a bit before entering, slightly more than the Artik-R but climbs well when it enters. Some gliders surge through the thermals and climb going forward. The B3 is a calm glider in that matter.  Flying it at 100 could improve the faster entry in stronger air and windy days. But even at 95 all up, it climbs well in overall conditions. 

Climb rate:

One of the strongest points of the B3 is the climb in very weak thermals, as it showed me a very good float ability in those small thermals. I think it is as efficient as the LT2 in that matter, putting it among the top gliders' efficiency in weak thermals. 

It feels as if the B3 holds into the weak thermal and embraces it. 

Comfort:

Another strong point is the comfort level it offers. It could be probably that wave leading edge, that gives you a feel of a very secure and strong passive safety.

The difference over the Bonanza 2 other than the overall performance of climb and glide angle especially at speed, is the amazing comfort of that 2-liner C. 

Glide angle:

I did many glides with the Bonanza 3. glided with the Zeno 2, which I will immediately say that the Z2 is from another further level of glide efficiency. Of course, I am not comparing it to the Zeno 2! But it is just an idea to know.

I also did glide with the Artik-R same size and wing load, and also with the UP Trango-X also the same size as the B3 and the same load. The glide angle at the trim and at bar is very close to the new 2 liners like the Volt 4 for example. I will update my 2 liner C comparison for the little details. But as far so good for the overall package it offers. 

Ears:

Ears are doable with outer A’s, and also with outer B’s. In both cases, they are efficient and easy to use with a little more pressure if you use the A-lines. But with hands high and a bit more persistent, it will close well. The opening is sometimes without pilot intervention. 

Pleasure under the Bonanza 3:

The moderate brake pressure and brake structure offer very nice agility and authority on the brakes giving the pilot an enjoyable ‘cool’ experience under the B3 making it pleasurable to fly for that specific category.

Usability:

Please keep in mind that it is not a high-B glider…The Bonanza 3 is a 2-liner C model, for that specific targeted group of pilots. But it will require no more than a C pilot under it. 

For example, a Bonanza 2 pilot would find it easier to fly than his old model.  Pilots on low-rated B gliders would be better to get a season or two on their high Bs before going for the Bonanza 3 which is logical for a safe evolution. 

B steering:

The B steering on the B3 while stepping on your speed bar is a nice experience with that efficient tool to keep the glider overhead. The pressure is moderate and balanced without being hard or soft. Just what it takes to have long XCs without being tired. 

Speed:

The trim speed is close to the Artik-R. The top speed is very usable, with moderate pressure on the speed bar delivering around 12 km/h over trim at 1000 ASL with a solid leading edge. 

Conclusion:

Again, manufacturers are trying to deliver easy 2-liner C machines for newcomers to that class without being overwhelmed by excessive feedback. The Bonanza 3 follows that path with its pleasurable and comfortable feel.   An EN-C pilot would feel at home under it. 

NOTE: 

 Please remember the C class requirements:

EN-C Certified Paragliders are designed for intermediate pilots who possess good “active piloting” skills and are quite familiar with recovery techniques. The pilot must fully understand the implications of flying a glider with reduced passive safety. Pilots should possess an advanced rating or certification, and have logged HUNDREDS of flight hours in ALL conditions (especially thermic). An “SIV” or “Advanced Maneuvers” Clinic should be completed by pilots flying EN-C Paragliders.

NIVIUK Artik-R   size 23

If you already read my previous test about the Artik 6 , then you surely felt that I really appreciated that overall complete glider. Now as the C certification allowed the use of collapse lines and other changes, Niviuk released to the market their new C class model, with its 2-line version and with a 6.5 aspect ratio. 

I have flown the size 23 which is certified from 80-95, and NIVIUK recommends the optimum flying weight of 87-92.

I flew that glider at 88- 92- and 95 all up on my X-rated 6 harness. 

The Artik-R has a really nice construction and the finishing details are really impressive. I think NIVIUK has made it a step further in delivering a really neat high quality product which is clearly shown when you unbox it. 

Launching :

Pulling on the A’s on the Artik-R at 92 all up, gave me a little heavy feel at the beginning of the rise, than normal in the middle rise, with very easy take-off behavior even in no wind. The take-off is immediate without the wing surging in front.  In a stronger breeze, the Artik -R can be easily mastered by the brakes, and there is no surging forward for a C pilot, rather than an immediate take-off. Overall take-off behavior is quite nice. 

Pitch and roll stability:

In the air, and later in different conditions, the pitch felt very stable, getting inside the lift is super comfortable even smoother than the Artik 6 which had a slightly more positive pitch feel. The Artik-R slows very slightly when encountering thermals. The roll stability seems very close to the Artik 6. Overall they felt close in comfort with probably +10…15% pilot demand in turbulent air for the Artik-R.  It is not summer yet to be precise, but it feels quite balanced. 

 The Artik-R has a taught and solid leading edge. Trying to pull the A’s showed me a logical heavy pressure, as the A’s are far back.  

Climb rate:

I flew the Artik-R in a very weak lift (+0.3 m/s) with no wind influence, at 93 all up, and I was really efficient with the best C gliders, or even D’s, to confirm after a while that the climb is in weak is really good! The Artik-R could float really well! In stronger thermals or with more wind, the Artik-R behaves calmly in pitch, and needs slightly more time to enter, but with a fairly good climb rate for the category.

Gliding power:

For two days, I had the privilege to fly with my friends on 2-liner C gliders!  Yann, on a Volt 4 M size max 102, Elie and I  (alternating) Artik-R and LT2. 

After many glides, we all had the same conclusions! 

The Artik-R holds now the crown having the top glide ratio for the 2 liners by a small margin, especially at full bar which is impressive!  

So I decided to try another very good 2-liner EN-D glider. (A Gin Leopard. But a bigger size ‘M’ was only available! ).  I know it is not fair to try it with the higher class but just an idea for me and also many pilots suggested that I try…

To be precise, the glide in ‘calm air’ at trim is similar. The glide at bar seems also incredibly similar!  The Artik-R showed me a true gliding machine for the C category. 

In turbulence and wind, or in the valley breeze, the Leopard with its 7 aspect and thinner profile had the edge of course with a high capacity in getting through and moving forward and up easily which is logical. 

I will hopefully try the Leopard with NIVIUK’s new 2-liner EN-D, the ’Peak 6’. A wing of the same class as the Leopard. 

Handling and pleasure:

The brake length of the Artik-R is slightly longer than the Artik 6, but it still with good agility. Not as sharp as the A6 in turns, but still good enough to be satisfied. Smoother in turns than the A6, as I was able to core every single thermal easily. The Artik-R doesn’t dive in turns as the A6. It turns more efficiently flat without losing the core. 

Throwing wingovers, and playing around on the Artik-R could also be playful, but it was engineered to be an efficient XC tool, getting the most out of the present lift. 

Flying the Artik-R in XC and transitions at bar is very efficient for the class. The B controls have a moderate pressure, slightly less than the LT2, with a swift response making it very easy to keep the glider overhead.  The leading edge kept its pressure in all my testing, and I was completely satisfied with the complete package.

Ears are stable, and the descent rate with half bar is around -2.5 m/s… -3 m/s, they reopen with pilot intervention. I also flew the Artik-R at 88 all up to be able to comment. It flies and handles a bit slower. It is safely doable if someone wishes., but to be efficiently competitive, I personally prefer to fly the size 23 at +93 all up.  I personally like my gliders to feel more dynamic and also I need more connection in strong air.  

Flying the Artik-R at 95 won’t lose anything in weak thermals, and would be better in getting faster into the heavy airmass.

360s needs two turns to get smoothly into it. Getting out while keeping your weight shift inside the turn is smooth like any other C. 

Conclusion: 

Today, manufacturers are trying to satisfy a large group of pilots from the high B's to the high C’s but some are resilient to deliver a suitable and comprehensive 2-liner for the C category. The Artik-R seems to have filled that gap comfortably.  

But there’s no miracle! In the 2-liner EN-D category, the Peak 6 for example was created to give you more performance with a higher pilot level. 

With the Artik-R, you are flying a 2-liner with near the comfort of 3-liner C’s. Perhaps around a +12 % increase in pilot level in strong air.  

There’s no special flying technique for the Artik-R!  So a confirmed C pilot, or even a ‘confirmed’ high B pilot with two full seasons in strong air, would find the Artik-R to be a nice evolution to fill his goals.  

The overall gliding performance ‘in moving air’ over the 3 liner C’s ‘example Artik 6’  is increased by 10-12 % (just a personal idea) 

Now the clearer advantage is the top speed when overlapping pulleys gives around +18 km/h over trim at 1000 ASL.   

I’m sure a demo would be an exciting and interesting experience! :-)  

 

Ozone Submarine M size

Ozone Submarine M size

Ozone released a harness for minimizing the drag produced by the pilot/harness combination, and the main purpose is the extra glide angle in competitions.

I received one Submarine in `M’  size for a test flight. 

The base harness is an exoceat that has been modified a bit. A thick wooden seat board is installed, and the chest strap width is fixed at around 50 cm. My personal feel and imagination, look like it is made to fit a pilot in a ‘Formula 1’ seating position! 

The soft envelope surrounds the harness and both hands are inserted like wearing a jacket with also a Zipper that comes from the end of the pod to the cockpit, and another one from the cockpit or the main deck to be secured at the pilot's neck exactly like zipping your warm jacket. The air enters by the front and when it inflates in this efficient aerodynamic shape, only the pilot's head and arms can be seen outside the Submarine. 

To reach that aerodynamic streamlined shape, you must adjust all the side and front adjustments to keep it horizontal while being convenient for your liking. Ozone made a very nice video following that link (   https://flyozone.com/paragliders/products/harnesses/submarine   )  explaining how it is done.  But for sure, to sit in that harness, you must be a hard-core resilient competition pilot with one focus on the finish line. 

The harness weighs around 8.3 kg for the M. There are two side rescue pockets, rather small pockets to fit a normal rescue with a bit of patience.

The triple -Bullet-pedal accelerator has a long cord, that should pass through the riser pulleys of your competition glider while you need to remove the original Dyneema line on the risers or at least wrap it around the riser. The video and pics show it well. 

I spent a whole day trying to find the best comfortable and horizontal position to my liking, and finally, I succeeded. The next day, was to try it in 30 km’h windy take-offs,  which to my surprise was really easy while holding the rear end under my arms before launch. My buddies were amused taking some pictures :-) attached…

Overall, when you get used to it, it’s easy to take off and land like any other harness out there. It’s just the time preparing it to fly that has to be a bit tricky. There are two cockpits to install the higher cockpit holds the flying instruments that can be seen through the plastic window, and the lower cockpit can also hold lots of instruments and a 5 kg water ballast.  

In the air, the Submarine feels and looks exactly like a Submarine !! :-)  As only the pilot's head is outside with his eyes near the long front surface, the air feels really smooth! That’s a description all the Submarine pilots would feel! The sound of the wind is calmer and the impression you get is a smooth aerodynamic efficiency…At least that’s a first feeling…

Later I flew with my friend both of us on Zeno 2 and the same size and same load. My friend with the Submarine M size and I’m on my X-rated 6.  

I really don’t want to get into lots of discussions and that’s just my small humble opinion.

On trim glides and about 5 km, I didn’t see any difference.  Above 53 km/h there’s a very slight improvement for the Submarine after 5 km.  

I think, for winning competitions you need to save every meter you gain after your long glides. So, 5 meters….10…15 meters…adding those meters after several glides could be your winning ticket to achieving your goals.  

Conclusion: 

I was amazed by the ingeniosity of that design. All the small details were studied to have that streamlined shape and efficiency.  It is a bit delicate to handle, and landing on a tree isn’t a good idea and will eventually destroy the outside envelope.  I don’t see how the rescue lines will pass near the collar without damaging the cloth…in case of a rescue opening. But it could happen without damage. 

The difference in efficiency to gain gliding performance between a normal seated harness and a pod harness with rear fairing is greater than comparing the same pod harness with fairing to a Submarine. 

But there’s a difference in speed and on long glides. 

Every pilot will find a whole complete set of harnesses from pod to simple ones to his liking. The Submarine is a complex harness for a purpose. 

If you are a very good competition pilot, and you need those extra meters that will help you get closer or be on a podium, then the Submarine is definitely for you if your competitors have a similar harness, then getting a high-end stream-lined harness like the Submarine, will keep you close in the game!

Triple Seven Q-Light MS (75-95)

Triple Seven Q-Light MS (75-95)

I have already tested the Queen 3 in that exact same size. Here’s the light version called Q-Light 3.

Triple Seven uses on the upper surface the superb Porcher Skytex 27 Double Coated and on the Leading edge Porcher Skytex 38. The bottom surface holds the Porcher Skytex 27 Double Coated and the profiles are made from Porcher Skytex 27. The hard finish Suspension and main lines used are PPSLS Liros and Edelrid A-8000-U. The new thinner risers are quite interesting.

Launching the Q-Light 3 at 92 all up is much better than the already good Queen 3. The Q-Light 3 launches faster and fills with air even with no wind! The air intakes are also very small like the Rook light, and the Queen 3, but the inflation of the Q-Light 3 is super easy! No hard point, no hanging back. Immediately take off. Problem solved on this Q-Light MS.

I flew in some moderate air and flew in some turbulent areas to confirm later that the overall movements are similar to the Queen 3. The Q-Light 3 doesn’t have the very tamed character of the Alpina 4. but it is more enjoyable to fly if the pilot prefers a little more roll feedback, a more direct shorter brake travel, and swift handling, with very slight pitch feedback. These features are excellent to have in a glider for educated pilots IMHO.
In strong or more turbulent air, it moves more than an Alpina 4 for example but stays on top of your head. It resembles the excellent Cayenne 5 movements.
The Q-Light seems slightly differently tuned than the Queen 3.

The trimming of the Q-Light 3 felt slightly different in a positive way. Probably it's the light fabric, but I think there’s a slight very small trimming change that allows the Q-Light to feel more fluid through the air.
After some glides with other 3 liners C’s, The Q-light 3 showed me no less than a top-end glide for that category. I think the Q-Light 3 glide angle is unquestionably good.
Flying next to my reference gliders in climb, I was impressed by the efficiency of the Q-light 3 as I was always able to match the best climber in that category.
The climb rate in the very weak and difficult lift on the Q-Light 3 felt also impressive as the Q-Light 3 floats incredibly well! After some hours in the weak lift, I can confirm that it really climbs like a “Queen”!

The brake travel is slightly higher than the Q-Light 2 I had and the overall agility is slightly reduced, but still, it's a pleasurable and agile glider to fly.

The C steering isn’t as fluid as some other C’s. I would have preferred a pulley on the B’s for smoother and linear C steering.
When pulling the C risers for control, the lines pass through a hard ring, rub and you can feel the pressure they induce. Another system with a pulley that delivers a smoother feel could be very welcomed!
The top speed is around 13 km over trim. The speed bar has a moderate pressure feel and is a bit harder at the end of the second step. Big ears are moderately stable and open without pilot intervention.

Conclusion:
I’m very curious to see what the new future 2-liner generation is willing to offer more and if they would be easier to manage or deliver more overall performance… One thing is certain. The 2 liners ‘feel’ and the way you control the B risers at speed are unique to them which is logical!
Now for the weekend warrior, who is looking for a 3-liner C at least for the next year to observe what would be the gain with the 2 liners, and also how well they would cope with summer turbulence, the Q-Light3 as a conventional 3-liner, has an impressively complete package of top end performance in glide and climb with very good agility and pleasurable handling.

Cheers,
Ziad

Niviuk Arrow M

Niviuk Arrow M 

During those 30 years, and of all the harnesses I test flew, this is my first Niviuk harness!  There’s always a first time :-) 

I have here for test flying the Niviuk Arrow in size M which has 95 % the same specification as their new Hawk but with a nice elongated fairing. 

The size M goes to 178cm pilot height. 

I’m 1.81 tall, but when I sat in an M size when I was at the Coupe Icare, it felt ok. 

So I ordered two sizes. One M just arrived and one L should arrive in a month or two hopefully. 

As you will see in a close-up in the video attached, the finish details and the work done, the sewing, on this Arrow harness is indeed superb and put the NK Arrow among the top-end harnesses for a clean finish detail in the market. 

The Arrow pod can be replaced easily if damaged by mistake with side zippers.  There’s a seat plate on the harness.  Under the seat is a pocket that fits a 4 kg water ballast. On the right side, the rescue pocket is wide enough can fit a Rogallo rescue. The rescue handle and pin can be installed without any additional cord if by chance you find yourself on the take-off and needed to change or replace the rescue. Very easy to install.

In the back, there’s a big pocket for the glider bag, a place for the water camel, and a small pocket with a zipper. There are also two plastic inserts if by chance you damage the air inlets, which is difficult because they are made of a soft plastic material. But just in case,  they can be replaced quickly.

There’s a lower side hole for a pee tube pass. Two brand new black aluminum carabiners are included and with a three-step speed bar. 

The most interesting part for me personally is the cockpit!  Just because as you will see in the video, it can open from a top with a slight pull on the blue ribbon. and it opens the inner container plainly and clearly while you fly. 

The cockpit container holds three compartments. Each compartment can hold whatever you choose to put. A chocolate bar, an extra instrument, An extra battery, a hat, a lucky charm…and they all are easily accessible. On my woody valley, it opens from the top but with a zipper and is sometimes difficult to open and maintain open as it needs effort to reach the zipper with warm gloves.

On the Arrow it is a clever innovation and a delight for me!

Sitting in the Arrow M size even with 1.81 cm and 75 kg is quite suitable. But I think the L size could be probably more adequate for my height. I will try and report back. Nevertheless, I felt having the legs naturally supported without any pressure point on my body. I flew the harness in some turbulent air, and later in smooth air. In all conditions, the Arrow offered the most balanced feedback with a high comfort side. The M-size chest strap opens to 50 cm max on the M, and even in strong air, I could easily be very comfortable on an S-size glider. The ABS system controls the movements without being too restrained. I mean all the movements are available smoothly for the pilot to understand the airmass without being too chatty or too dull. That’s why I said that the Arrow gives the most balanced feedback. Less movement than the Genie light 3, slightly similar to the Delight 4 but without the ABS restraining system of the D4. 

Weight shifts are also efficient on the Arrow with a nice turning radius. (Information taken from the same glider that was used on the Genie light 3 and the Delight 4).   

Overall a perfect blend of feedback and smoothness. And that’s at 50 cm opened chest strap. Pilots can also tighten the chest strap as much as they prefer for an even more stable harness to their preference.

Conclusion: 

Let's keep it short:

The smoothness and features of a Mercedes with the look of a Ferrari. Plain and simple. Try it!! 

OZONE Submarine M size

 

:-)      Soon... 

HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!

 HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!! 

We fly for peace! We fly for freedom!  

An incredibly beautiful flight today, ending this year !!
Wishing all pilots blessed and wonderful flights!
HAPPY NEW YEAR !!! 🌟 ✨ 🎉 💫

SOL LT 2 , S size / 75-95 / EN-C

 

Disclaimer:

Related to my earlier tests: Many pilots already know very well how I do the tests, but I need to continue my explanations for some. When comparing gliders in a weak lift with the same load for both, I feel sometimes that glider X climbs slightly less than the one next to it, which is always “my reference glider” for that matter.  That does not mean that glider X doesn’t climb well, or the pilot would sink and land!  It is just that my reference glider is still a better climber or a better floater…And the pilot on glider X if he flies alone, or if he flies next to less or better-skilled friends will never notice it.

Not all gliders are created equal.    :D 

Now with the SOL LT2, it is completely another story …

SOL  LT2  EN-C (2 liner)

SOL is a very old Brazilian paragliding company. Here’s the link to see their multiple and vast catalog of products. https://www.solparagliders.com.br/ 

In 1991, they designed their first paraglider the Magic fun. Here’s a link to their history: https://www.solparagliders.com.br/linha-do-tempo

I have flown many SOL gliders in the past, Ellus, Eclipse, Torck, Synergy, Lotus one… I know the feel under a SOL glider! They have lots of features, but one thing in common is being good in weak lifts.

Despite that SOL was introduced 2 years ago, the LT1 that I didn’t unfortunately fly, and which was the first 2 liner intended for the C category public, But wasn’t possible due to EN-C rules. So SOL got a CCC certification. 

Now the C certification has changed, allowing the use of collapse lines and other features, and manufacturers are able to insert a 2-line concept into that box.  

And hoping to be able to test all those 2 liners…

In this test, I will try to give you the differences between the VOLT 4, and the LT2.

 

SOL used different materials on the LT 2 from the outside bag to the concertina bag and for sure another cloth for the glider. 

The cloth used on top and bottom is called:  WTX 40 gr/m² SI+PU / WTX 29 gr/m² SI+PU.

The lines used are VECTRAN 0,6 - 0,9 - 1,0 - 1,2 - 1,4 - 2,2  /  TECHNORA 2,1. 

Even the risers are different, as they used a more supple fabric: Polyester Venus 15 mm. 1.600 kg

Plastic rods are inserted from the leading edge to the trailing edge with a separation in the middle for folding it may be. 

The glider is slightly heavier than a normal Delta 4 with perhaps +700 grams more. 

Launching:

I flew the LT2  S size 75-95 at 94 all up, and later at 90 all up which was also ok, and still well-pressurized. But I think around 92-93 could be the optimum weight in overall conditions.

Pulling on the A’s in nil wind has a heavy pull as the fabric is slightly heavier, but the LT 2 comes up evenly, without any hard point, and inflates really well, and with 2 steps I found myself airborne.

In 15 km/h wind on take-offs, the LT2 rises moderately, and no steps are needed to take off! It's immediate. 

The LT2 brake pressure goes from moderate to slightly hard. After the 12 cm gap, 10 cm can control the LT2 in turns and showed me calm agility with linear response and nice flat turns,

with moderate pressure.  Afterward, the brakes are slightly harder but the agility is more present and can core the narrowest of thermals!  So overall, I think the LT2 has acceptable agility which is super efficient through the air.  (I will elaborate on that later in this test)  

The LT 2 pitch behavior is very smooth and super efficient in weak and strong thermals. The glider pulls you gently upward and goes through that airmass and goes forward smoothly! It is super efficient for the climb!  

Flying in very weak conditions next to my reference glider, showed me, an even more, impressive and super-efficient climb rate on the LT2!  When the thermals are even less than 0.5 m/s, the LT 2 floats like no other wing! It reminds me of the Zeno 1 ability to stay in the lift!  

That I can confirm. That glider will help a lot in light lift. The LT2 felt solid and yet climbs with a neutral pitch and the whole glider is slipping through the airmass. The feel of a 2-liner under it is very different from the 3-liner feel which doesn’t give you that one-piece solid structure getting through the airmass…That’s the best way I could describe it.  

I have flown next to higher-rated 2-liners, D-gliders, and also near my reference in the 3-liner C class. For example, the LT2 similarly loaded as an Alpina 4 same size and load, have one, or two km more trim speed. The LT2 showed me a faster trim speed and the Alpina 4 needed to push the speed bar 1/4 to stay at the same speed.  The glide in calm air favors slightly the LT2, but when surfing the airmass on a glide and getting the lift lines, my friend and I were convinced that the LT2 is a 2-liner from a different class. 

The glide efficiency in those XC and racing conditions favors the LT2! On the first speed bar, the LT2 showed us an even a much better glide angle! This is the reference now for the first 2 liners and all the C class 3 liners by a little margin. I think it comes now super close to the Mantra 7 in overall efficiency …

Stepping on the second speed bar (moderate foot pressure) with pulleys overlapping, and with a very taught leading edge, I saw for the first time on a C, +18 km/h over trim, which gave me 58-59 km/h km/h on my GPS in calm air!  At that speed, the LT2 loses a bit of its glide angle.  I think at 50-53 km/h, the glide angle stays superb. 

In moderate turbulent air and while being 50 % on the speed bar, the B controls can efficiently control the pitch with moderate to slightly hard pressure on the wooden handles.  

The LT2 doesn’t have a high roll movement, probably slightly more than the VOLT 4, but in strong air, the LT2 needs more pilot control as the overall movements are a bit more present than the ones on the VOLT4 and even a bit more than the Trango X-Race.  It has a character of its own. Solid, firm, and fairly comfortable, but requires respect for the C category pilot. It is not a toy, like my reference and excellent Alpina 4 for example. If I want to position it accurately,  in terms of pilot control, the LT2 sits between the 3-liners C class and the 3-liners D class. 

Ears with outer A’s are stable, but you need to pull hard as the tips hold some pressure. They fold nicely, and they reopen only on pilot intervention. 360s are quite nice and loose easily altitude without being too centrifugal. Landing the LT2 requires a little of ‘finesse’ in a very small spot as it really floats!  But you can slow it smoothly and accurately with the brakes.

Conclusion: 

In my humble opinion, I think SOL created their best C glider to date! Not only that, the LT2 until now has an ‘edge’ on all certified C-class gliders out there. There will be a new crop of 2 liners coming in, and I really hope to see what they will offer. 

For now, I received the SOL LT2, and it is a real 2 liner C glider with a solid structure, impressive climb rate, good agility, incredible top speed, fairly comfortable for the keen C pilot, and for sure holds the crown for the best gliding C machine until today 10 December 2022, as I’m writing the review.  

Pilots have different tastes and requirements, and I hope you get yourselves a demo LT2 in order to see if that creation meets your skills, and expectations, or wins your heart! 

Happy and safe landings everyone :-)  

PS: I’ll try to offer you the maximum feedback on my renewed and updated C comparison for the 3 liners and including all new C 2 liners. 

NOVA Mentor 7 Light - XS / 75-95

 

NOVA Mentor 7 Light  XS (75-95) 

Disclaimer:

As many of you know me very well, I always follow the new upcoming gliders and new releases, and in  April 2021, I heard about the Mentor 7 and rushed quickly to order one.  In this lapse of one and a half years, I received many emails asking me about that glider, but I wasn’t able to receive it…while all the magazines, Cross Country, FlyBubble, (Tests and videos on their well-respected websites), and lots of other pilots around the world got one or at least flew a demo one, of the Mentor 7 Light!  So despite my many emails, and discussions with NOVA, The Mentor 7 light didn’t arrive until today. 

I was indeed unlucky ;-) …

The tests:

Mentor 7 Light size XS flown at 92 all up. 

Again, many of you might have seen the Mentor 7 light, the construction and details are really nice with a hybrid configuration, meaning that there are a few attachment points on the C risers reducing drag, and probably NOVA was aiming for more performance, and also getting more interest for pilots who are looking to get the latest design closing the gap to a 2 liner feel…

The take-off is really easy with a moderate pull without any hard points in weak windy take-offs. In stronger wind, the Mentor 7 seems also very smooth to launch. 

That day, I shared the flight with my friends on their Swift 6 gliders. One  Swift 6 size S (65-85) flew at 84 all up, and another Swift 6  sizes MS (75-95) flew at 93 all up. I was at the same load as the pilot on the Swift 6 MS size, and it was a superb way to experience all the movements, and see the real-time efficiency of the glider in the test. 

I flew that glider in relatively strong and turbulent conditions to later weaker and smoother conditions.

I must say….The Mentor 7 Light felt like flying a tandem in the positive side of the meaning. I never felt that dampened behavior on a high B wing, and probably very close to some low B gliders in terms of ‘air information’ and roll and pitch movements. The Swift 6 feels as I test flew it is an easy and smooth glider for the high B category. The M7 light has probably twice the comfort of the S6 !! especially in moving air.  It's even more comfortable than the Swing Nyos 2 RS !!  Is it too much?  Each pilot will decide! 

There are pilots who will adore that feel, and some could reach for a more spicy feel like the Maestro 2, Rush 6, for example. Lots of different tastes for all the pilots to choose from. 

But I have to say! With this 2.5-line configuration, I think NOVA has really worked hard on the internal structure of the Mentor 7 light in order to achieve that solid and compact feel. 

After the comfortable and smooth Air Design Volt 4 as a 2-liner C glider, here’s the Mentor 7  with its 2.5 line configuration, with high comfort for a high B glider.  

The Mentor 7 light XS at 93 has a faster trim speed than a brand new Swift 6 size MS at 93 also by +1 km/h. 

The brake travel is short with moderate, to slightly hard pressure. The Swift 6, Maestro 2, and Mentor 6 are slightly lighter. And again, some pilots would appreciate that solid feel in their hands.  The agility is quite ok on the M7. Probably a bit less agile than the Mentor 6 XS tops at 90, but still quite good, close enough to the Swift 6 agility in thermals. In some small thermals, I was able to core very tightly without missing the core. 

If you want it more agile, try to pull the B3 at half pull inside a thermal, and you will experience a super agile B glider! :-) It's funny to try! 

My tests are not only about performance, so I will try to describe the feeling under it as much as I can and that could help you decide if you also cannot get one.

In strong cores the Mentor 7 has a nearly absent pitch behavior, the roll also is very dampened. It slides efficiently through the airmass calmly and the climbing ability is surely present but slow. 

I mean it climbs ok but needs time to reach the cloud base as the other gliders in the air.  In weak thermals, this insane stability erases the small information about that tiny lift, so it is very difficult to feel that tiny lift, and also the climb is there but needs time to get to higher altitudes. 

Some gliders could be described as having a good float ability in the rising airmass. The Mentor 7 size XS, that I flew has a moderate float ability if flown at 90 all up. 

The turning behavior inside any thermal allows the Mentor 7 to stay on rails. It never gets thrown outside the thermal, and with its brake authority, I could place it immediately whenever I wanted inside a core.

Gliding with my friend on his Swift 6,  ( I think your eyes are more open now? … :-)    Hmmm…Ok, So in gliding in the same airmass my friend pushed a bit on the bar to stay close to my trim speed on the Mentor 7 Light. The glide is close enough and I will update my B comparison as soon as possible for the little details if needed…

Trying again and again in many types of conditions, showed me that the Mentor 7 light has a very good glide efficiency that is close to the best ones in that category.

Pulling half the speed system showed me a glide improvement on the Mentor 7 light which is really interesting and will place it at the top of that category. At the full bar, the Mentor 7 Light is a fast high B with probably 2 km/h more speed than the Swift 6 with the same load. I think maybe I got a 16 km/h over the already fast trim speed.

Ears while pulling the B3 are really cool! They are very efficient! I could get down nicely on this configuration. Moderate 360s don’t deliver high G’s, and less than many B’s. 

Conclusion:

NOVA delivered a different Mentor.  It has a completely different feel, a different design, and a different approach! NOVA aficionados will give their own judgment after a test flight…

I only Wished it had more lift ability and a more nimble feel, but that’s me and my picky bad habits ;-), but for strong alpine conditions, the Mentor 7 Light will let you concentrate on the task, on the scenery, on your favorite snack, chocolate bar, while gliding through that abundant lift.

The combination of accessibility/performance ratio is really high on the Mentor 7 Light. 

UPDATE:
Today was a good day to try and fly the Mentor 7 Light, XS at 86 all up.
I changed my harness under the Mentor 7 XS to the Genie light 3 size M which gives slightly more roll and nicer weight shifting. My overall weight was 86.
I have flown on a generous day with some turbulence that my friends informed me later on landing… I thought it was really calm under the M7.

Flying the Mentor 7 light XS at 86 all up, gives even more comfort and still with a very coherent and taught feel. In turbulence, the glider stays well connected. I have flown many gliders, and I think this is not an evolution in feel, but a revolution since this high B glider is calmer than some EN-A gliders. Pilots coming from the low B category will immediately feel at home under the Mentor 7 Light which is targetted as an intermediate glider for pilots who already have flown lower-rated gliders, and like to move a high-performance glider.

In weak conditions, less than 0.5 m’s, the overall movements in pitch and roll are super dampened that I needed to concentrate more on the vario sound to core efficiently as the overall movements are nearly absent in those small conditions.
And of course, being at the middleweight does favor slightly the climbing ability and in a moderate 1m/s thermal, the Mentor 7 light flown at mid-weight will climb close enough to many high B’s. My comparison is updated for the little details.